Blackmagic Forum

I don't understand the part about RAM. The iMac has only four slots for RAM.

Uli Plank wrote:I don't understand the part about RAM. The iMac has only four slots for RAM.

Oh, I realized my mistake, sorry....

Question: HDD setup/workflow for Resolve

I shoot to Samsung T5 SSD (500GB), then copy it to Drive 1st, and make a backup of it to Drive 2nd "the backup". (probably WD My Book 6TB drives)

How many drives I need or is recommended for editing with Resolve? Lets assume I shoot 4K Prores (about 5.2 TB for 800min footage), I back it up to the 2 WD drives... Now my files are stored. Perfect. But from what I edit? I want to edit proxy, delivery is HD.

I planned a single drive Lacie d2 with Thunderbolt3 for editing.

Will it work like this? I connect one of the WD drives with the 4K footage, and Resolve makes the proxy to the Lacie d2 drive (the proxy would be a few hundreds GB about I guess).

I disconnect the WD drive... I edit from Lacie drive..... When color grade I connect the WD drives and Resolve uses the original files from there... I render out to Lacie

Is it okay like this?

Gabe, have you seen B&H Photo? Take a look at this for $2,099 including twice the internal storage (2 TB Fusion), the much better 580 GPU, significantly faster i5 CPU. You remove the included 2x4GB RAM and install 3rd party 2x16GB.

If I was buying it, I’d use all SSD for internal storage, not the relatively slow hybrid Fusion drive. The drive they put with it is likely not 10000/7200 rpm; bet it’s 5400 rpm and it will feel slower. I understand the 1TB internal SSD option is expensive, but it’s what I have on my 2015 iMac.

Try this:
https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1468273-REG


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

You edit and grade from your proxy files; it’s only on final render in Deliver that you need your original files.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

rick.lang wrote:Gabe, have you seen B&H Photo? Take a look at this for $2,099 including twice the internal storage (2 TB Fusion), the much better 580 GPU, significantly faster i5 CPU. You remove the included 2x4GB RAM and install 3rd party 2x16GB.

If I was buying it, I’d use all SSD for internal storage, not the relatively slow hybrid Fusion drive. The drive they put with it is likely not 10000/7200 rpm; bet it’s 5400 rpm and it will feel slower. I understand the 1TB internal SSD option is expensive, but it’s what I have on my 2015 iMac.

Try this:
https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1468273-REG


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Rick, I'm located in EU... So prices are more radical here for Apple products... about +25%

rick.lang wrote:You edit and grade from your proxy files; it’s only on final render in Deliver that you need your original files.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

So Rick, please tell if I understand correctly:
1, I stor the 5.2TB 4K Prores footage on slow WD My Book drives.....
2, Resolve makes the proxy from this to the Lacie drive (I will edit on)
3, I edit on Lacie drive, color grade
4, when delivering, I attach the WD drives and Resolve makes the final render in the desired resolution HD/UHD etc..

Right?

(I'm not really sure how correctly one can make a fine-tuned color grade from proxy files? :-S )

For what it's worth, I think it's silly to get less than 8GB GPU and 32GB RAM if you want to buy a machine that will last you longer than a year or two. I mostly edit on an HD timeline using 4k footage, and while the playback may be fine in the timeline with a lesser spec, while you are scrubbing for footage in your source window, you will most likely suffer playback issues.

The time saved using a faster computer over the course of a year will probably end up being more cost effective than saving a few hundred dollars.

Why not go refurb? The German Apple Store, for example, has currently listed dozens of 27" iMacs from 1.700 to 3,500 €. The cheapest one with the 580 is 2.119,00 €.

If your recordings are BRAW or ProRes, you can save yourself the whole proxy workflow with a good, fast USB-3 drive.

Gave, I don’t use that workflow but if you do that due to space limitations on faster drives rendering from the WD drives will be slow but should still work. I wish you had a bigger budget as you may be frustrated going to an underpowered solution.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

rick.lang wrote:Gave, I don’t use that workflow but if you do that due to space limitations on faster drives rendering from the WD drives will be slow but should still work. I wish you had a bigger budget as you may be frustrated going to an underpowered solution.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I've wrote many things in the past which ended up in the drawer do to size and cost... So now I want to construct it to be able to be made on my own. So if its slower, who cares? If the system will be capable of deliver a nice final file then its okay for me.

If I edit with proxies, which in my case will have a size around 4-600 GB, would it be logical to use a Samsung T5 1TB drive for these proxies for editing? Would it be reliable solution? Or its wiser to go the standard 7200rpm drives?

If you'll be editing with proxies then you probably won't need the speed of an SSD, and a 7200rpm drive would do fine. I would be interested to see how proxies perform against BRAW in Resolve. I have edited quite a bit in BRAW and it is very smooth.

Should be reliable and if you already own the SSD, it should privide better performance than a spinning hard disk. You can test the performance of both options by using Blackmagic Speed Test downloaded from the BMD Support Page if you don’t already have it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Just as curiosity:

Is a 2018 Mac mini with 6 core, i7, 256GB SSD, 32 GB Ram and integrated Intel UHD 630 is capable of running Resolve 15 with editing, color grade, deliver for HD Prores HQ footage?

I see that many rave about it for FCPX, even for HD or 4K Prores footage, but no words about Resolve performance.

That intel GPU is no good for Resolve.

The answer which is begging to be offered is, why insist on a Mac? For under $2000, you can get an extremely powerful Windows system, with multiple hard disks. And no need for proxies or all these other acrobatics.

John Paines wrote:That intel GPU is no good for Resolve.

The answer which is begging to be offered is, why insist on a Mac? For under $2000, you can get an extremely powerful Windows system, with multiple hard disks. And no need for proxies or all these other acrobatics.

I'm afraid of self built computers.. Too many variable and too much risks to work seamlesly.... I also don't like Windows....

There are reputable internet builders, which sell both pre-designed packages as well as custom-built units, where you choose every component. And look at the Resolve forum here: it's not as if Mac users have no "issues" unique to their systems.

I have no experience of them, but there may be a Micro Center computer store near you... I believe they also do custom builds.

The choice seems to be living a little more dangerously or buying a system which really isn't up to what you need.

I decided to go with this
iMac 27", 3,0 GHz‑es, 6 core, Core i5
Radeon Pro 570X with 4GB vram
8 GB 2666 MHz DDR4
1 TB Fusion Drive
+
32GB ram from other vendor

If I feel its slow, then I later I can still add an eGPU, like Blackmagic eGPU with Radeon Pro 580x, right?

Yes but your external may be limited. If I understand correctly, if you use multiple GPUs the work is shared. As a result, the faster runs at the speed of the slower unless you restrict Resolve to the faster GPU in which case you are back to one GPU.

My understanding is that you should get the fastest GPU built in to both reduce the need for and improve the usefulness of an external GPU. If you can get a Vega 64 built in for example, a Radeon VII makes a great external.

Are you sure about this? Nobody wrote me about this before....

They use eGPU with the new Mac Minis which has inferior GPU compared to the iMac of my choice.... And they use it eaisly

Gabe Darvas wrote:Are you sure about this? Nobody wrote me about this before....

They use eGPU with the new Mac Minis which has inferior GPU compared to the iMac of my choice.... And they use it eaisly

Check this site for more info on eGPU https://barefeats.com/

MishaEngel wrote:

Gabe Darvas wrote:Are you sure about this? Nobody wrote me about this before....

They use eGPU with the new Mac Minis which has inferior GPU compared to the iMac of my choice.... And they use it eaisly

Check this site for more info on eGPU https://barefeats.com/

i couldn't find info for the mentioned question....

I am seldom sure of much but a few have written about this before Some threads to review:

In this thread "Dermot Shane" says: "what ever faster will stop and wait until the slower GPU finishes"
viewtopic.php?f=21&t=87458&p=487531&hilit=dual+gpu+question#p487531

Here "Hendrik Proosa" says: "My guess is that each gpu is served frames in sequential order"
viewtopic.php?f=21&t=89574&p=500375&hilit=dual+gpu+question#p500375

In this thread waltervolpatto says: "If you have two different GPU, the software will pair the performances to the lesser of the two."
viewtopic.php?f=21&t=93187&p=518242&hilit=disable+gpu#p518242

The usual caveats: (a) I and the other posters appear to be presenting our observations based on our understandings of the technology and what testing we have done - take it all with a grain of salt until BMD contributes definitive information to the conversation;
(b) everything is subject to change and it may be that the queuing algorithm has changed by now so that the jobs are not evenly distributed in a blocking way but in a partially async, least-full-first-filled distribution of work blocks;
and (c) you can always limit Resolve to the faster GPU if you find it is being limited by the built in one.

"and (c) you can always limit Resolve to the faster GPU if you find it is being limited by the built in one."

This one sentence is enough for me! If I am not satisfied with the 570x with 4GB built-in GPU, then I can add a 580 Pro eGPU to it with 8GB vram, and tell Resolve to use the 8GB videocard...

So I think I'll pull the trigger on this iMac with the 570x

Gabe, I haven’t gone to check this but I think you can limit the GUI in Resolve to use one GPU so the other is free to do the heavy lifting at its maximum speed.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

rick.lang wrote:Gabe, I haven’t gone to check this but I think you can limit the GUI in Resolve to use one GPU so the other is free to do the heavy lifting at its maximum speed.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Rick, thanks!

I've considered many options with iMacs, even Mac Mini, but this machine should do it I think.

Gabe Darvas wrote:

MishaEngel wrote:

Gabe Darvas wrote:Are you sure about this? Nobody wrote me about this before....

They use eGPU with the new Mac Minis which has inferior GPU compared to the iMac of my choice.... And they use it eaisly

Check this site for more info on eGPU https://barefeats.com/

i couldn't find info for the mentioned question....

Than look no futher, you won't find it anyway and not because it isn't there.

Check this site for more info on eGPU https://barefeats.com/[/quote]

i couldn't find info for the mentioned question....[/quote]

Than look no futher, you won't find it anyway and not because it isn't there.[/quote]

Then show me where does it mention the topic I'm asking, so about Radeon Pro570x with eGPU.... Because I could not find that specific combo

By the way, theres a huge sale (its off about 700 usd), so I could get the Macbook Pro 15" wiith Radeon Pro 555x (4GB vram), 16GB ram, 256 GB ssd, Core i7 for the same price I want to get the iMac 27 with Radeon Pro 570x (4GB vram) with 16 or 32 GB ram, Core i5

Gabe Darvas wrote:Check this site for more info on eGPU https://barefeats.com/

i couldn't find info for the mentioned question....[/quote]

Than look no futher, you won't find it anyway and not because it isn't there.[/quote]

Then show me where does it mention the topic I'm asking, so about Radeon Pro570x with eGPU.... Because I could not find that specific combo[/quote]

The display is handled by the built in GPU, the compute is handled by the eGPU.

When you use them both for compute(Resolve) the eGPU(Radeon VII for example) will have the same effective speed and memory as the Radeon Pro570x (f*ck*ng slow and only 4 GB).

Then show me where does it mention the topic I'm asking, so about Radeon Pro570x with eGPU.... Because I could not find that specific combo[/quote]

The display is handled by the built in GPU, the compute is handled by the eGPU.

When you use them both for compute(Resolve) the eGPU(Radeon VII for example) will have the same effective speed and memory as the Radeon Pro570x (f*ck*ng slow and only 4 GB).

MishaEngel wrote:Then show me where does it mention the topic I'm asking, so about Radeon Pro570x with eGPU.... Because I could not find that specific combo

The display is handled by the built in GPU, the compute is handled by the eGPU.

When you use them both for compute(Resolve) the eGPU(Radeon VII for example) will have the same effective speed and memory as the Radeon Pro570x (f*ck*ng slow and only 4 GB).[/quote]

Misha,
I understand the words you write, but don't understand the logic behind it (if its true). Because eGPUs were invented excatly for this reason, if you have a low quality GPU in your computer, or intergrated graphics like in Mac Mini or Macbook Pros, then you can add an eGPU with for example Radeon Pro 580x with 8GB ram and you have a great editing machine. Many people buy the new Mac mini and add an eGPU and say its amazing speed and solution..... So what do I get wrong? If eGPU can be used effectively with an intergrated GPU system, then why couldn't it be used effectively with an iMac with dedicated Radeon Pro 570x gpu?

Just don't use the internal one for computing.

Uli Plank wrote:Just don't use the internal one for computing.

Exactly.

Okay, I understand it...

If I have eGPU, then use the eGPU for all computing in Resolve for example.... Do not use both, as it reduces to the lowest speed GPU...

If I don't have eGPU, then I use whatever I have in the iMac

Why wouldn't you just go for the 8GB internal one if you're considering buying an eGPU as well?

Alex Aitken wrote:Why wouldn't you just go for the 8GB internal one if you're considering buying an eGPU as well?

Alex,
I don't know if I get an eGPU or not, its just an option I asked about.... Of course it would be nice to buy Radeon Pro 580X or go straight with an iMac Pro.... But money...

But the difference in price for a Radeon 580 internally would be far less than for any eGPU, plus it's more efficient. One 580 would prepare you for 4K already.

Uli Plank wrote:But the difference in price for a Radeon 580 internally would be far less than for any eGPU, plus it's more efficient. One 580 would prepare you for 4K already.

Yes, I know, but.... this time I will shoot Prores HD for this project. As I researched, there's really no need for a no-budget/micro-budget feature length film to push for 4K.... A properly shot Prores HD is Okay. If the film works, then no one gives a **** if its 4K or HD or iPhone...

So for Prores HD to edit, grade, deliver in Resolve, I think this iMac with i5, 32GB ram, Radeon Pro 570x should be okay, right? And if for the future I need to go 4K, then I still add an eGPU, right?

(I also fancied the idea of a 21.5 iMac, with Core i7, 16GB ram and Radeon Pro 560x with 4GB ram. This would be in price the same as the 27" version I mentioned, but I don't think the i7 cpu worth sacrificing the bigger screen and the option to add more ram later...)

It will be OK. Actually, I use the bigger one with an i5 too, since there is less risk of overheating.
And what you say about the film is fully correct – if it's good, nobody will care for 4K.
Heck, I'm still watching some masterpieces on DVD, upscaled by my projector…

Uli Plank wrote:It will be OK. Actually, I use the bigger one with an i5 too, since there is less risk of overheating.
And what you say about the film is fully correct – if it's good, nobody will care for 4K.
Heck, I'm still watching some masterpieces on DVD, upscaled by my projector…

Exactly....

Doing a film on your own, its inevitable that you have to consider technical questions also, but after a certain point I think it becomes counter-productive...

One more thing though, is it worth getting this iMac 27 with 256GB SSD instead of the 1TB Fusion drive?

Not really. 256 is pretty limited and one shouldn't use the system drive for too much else than system and software anyway. You'll need enough external drives anyway.

If you put your cache on a fast external SSD, even a small one, you gain more.

Uli Plank wrote:Not really. 256 is pretty limited and one shouldn't use the system drive for too much else than system and software anyway. You'll need enough external drives anyway.

If you put your cache on a fast external SSD, even a small one, you gain more.

Thanks, I stay with Fusion drive then!

I plan to edit from G-Drive with USB3, or I can edit from the Samsung T5 500GB SSD drive also which I use for recording from the camera now

I totally understand that it costs more up front, but the notion that you're even considering it made me suggest to get the 8GB up front. If money vs performance is the biggest concern then PC should undoubtedly be the choice..

Of course nobody cares if its 4K, but even editing a feature in an HD timeline is taxing on a system. I've done 3 x feature documentaries on my old self built PC system and that had a 1070 8GB RAM GPU and I don't know how I would have done it without that. Of course it's possible but it will be so slow when you're trying to jump around the timeline quickly, not to mention exporting.

Gabe, you must be coming to a conclusion on the specs for a budget machine. I think I should reinforce the suggestion to go with 580 and 8GB VRAM. Let me remind you I’m on a iMac 2015 that was maxed out and I primarily edit 2K/HD and it can have good days and bad days... so bad due to thermal throttling or maxing our my 4GB GPU or both. I would avoid going too low or you’ll be miserable and cussing it as you try to do 4K.

I’m hoping to be able to afford to upgrade to the newer Mac Pro (or reluctantly an iMac Pro), but I’m looking forward to a system with as big a GPU as I can afford.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

rick.lang wrote:Gabe, you must be coming to a conclusion on the specs for a budget machine. I think I should reinforce the suggestion to go with 580 and 8GB VRAM. Let me remind you I’m on a iMac 2015 that was maxed out and I primarily edit 2K/HD and it can have good days and bad days... so bad due to thermal throttling or maxing our my 4GB GPU or both. I would avoid going too low or you’ll be miserable and cussing it as you try to do 4K.

I’m hoping to be able to afford to upgrade to the newer Mac Pro (or reluctantly an iMac Pro), but I’m looking forward to a system with as big a GPU as I can afford.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Rick,
Best case would be the new Mac Pro for sure, but right now this iMac is the max I can afford in price range. I also browsed the net for PC alternatives, but I don't know how others claim it can be cheaper, I don't find it true. Yes, you can buy a PC tower which is higher specs at this price, but then when you add a 5K screen, comperable to the iMac's, then you have a more expensive system already. Plus, you'll still struggle with Windows... As I see, with iMacs you basically get the screen for "free"

Keep in touch.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I can also say that my iMac is hitting a sweet spot for me. If I would even consider the MAC Pro, I’d definitely think about a PC instead. The 27“ screen is excellent.